


TWW Meta Collection

by deandratb



Category: The West Wing
Genre: F/M, Gen, Meta
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2020-03-28
Updated: 2020-03-28
Packaged: 2021-02-28 17:13:57
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 5
Words: 6,772
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/23360749
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/deandratb/pseuds/deandratb
Summary: Metas from my tumblr, copied here for safekeeping.
Relationships: Amy Gardner & Donna Moss, Amy Gardner/Josh Lyman, Andrea Wyatt/Toby Ziegler, Josh Lyman/Donna Moss, Mandy Hampton/Josh Lyman
Comments: 2
Kudos: 19





	1. Will Bailey, Complicated Fave

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> Thoughts on Will Bailey, by request.

**Notes for the Chapter:**

> On my blog [here.](https://actuallylorelaigilmore.tumblr.com/post/178634062790/i-too-am-in-a-tww-rewatch-because-well-i-enjoy)

_I too am in a TWW rewatch, because well I enjoy torturing myself by watching competent articulate political types. (That and the great tv) I'm really struggling with Will. He seems like such an creep the further it goes on yet all the female characters seem to like him. I feel like I'm missing something. Do you have any views on him?_

_I have views on everything!! :D Seriously though, nobody’s ever asked me about Will so what a great chance for an essay. (This got REALLY long, fair warning.)_ **  
**

First, a disclaimer. I’ve never been very active on Twitter, but when I started using it, I mostly followed TWW actors. I occasionally tweeted at them, and I never expected responses, because they were amazing actors from this show I revered, and I was a random fangirl on social media. But two of them did, and were SO nice, and it shocked me so much back in the day to realize how kind and down-to-earth TWW cast is, when I had just seen the series and hadn’t yet found tumblr or watched interviews. It really made an impression on me. Richard Schiff called me ‘very sweet’ and won my heart forever, and Joshua Malina was also totally friendly and nice, so much so that I felt bad for never really liking his character much.

That’s right, I too used to think Will was obnoxious. But once I realized the actor was kinda awesome, I reconsidered his character and gave him a chance. So I’m glad you asked me, as I’ve been on both sides with Will and really love him now.

IMO, Will Bailey came in not just as a replacement for Sam, but also as a character with very different values, who was meant to contrast with our heroes at a crucial time.

Mid-S4, when Will is first introduced, we meet him as a skilled, idealistic writer who’s also got strong organizational and leadership skills. That’s different from any of our faves, since both Sam and Toby are talented wordsmiths, and both are idealistic in their own ways, but they’re also both oriented towards behind-the-scenes work. Toby is very team-focused and loyal but he would like it if everyone would leave him alone and let him do what he’s good at–messaging and writing and trying to nudge the people around him onto the path he thinks is best. When CJ is promoted above him to become COS, he cares even less about the professional snub than Josh does, because it’s not something he wanted.

And while Sam has political aspirations, he never really shows leadership qualities. He’s an excellent second to Toby and even for Josh when needed, but he’s also shown to be the least canny and experienced of them all, and you could argue that being in front of the camera as a candidate for office doesn’t always equal being a leader, if your staff is really running the show for you, which is what Sam’s campaign looks like. Everyone around him coordinates the details and runs things to leave him space to just be The Guy. But Will Bailey is both the guy running the show behind the scenes AND the guy who can get on camera and speak about the politics and ideals of his campaign because his family and professional background made him much more well-rounded. Heck, he’s even in the armed forces on top of all that! He’s portrayed as good at all the things he does.

Now, what’s interesting to me is that Will, as he’s first introduced, is much more confident and idealistic than he is later on. Early Will goes through a serious transformation, from Toby’s new second to an independent operator who lacks the loyalty the others have to a man more than to a party. To some extent, Will’s rebellious, ‘you need me more than I need you’ attitude was there from the moment Sam showed up to his winning campaign, but I think that who Aaron Sorkin (who had worked with the actor a lot before) conceived him as changed after Sorkin left. The showrunners for S5-7 saw an opportunity in his character’s feisty campaign background and turned him into someone with even less personal loyalty and more detached pragmatism.

The fact is, that’s not what Sorkin-era TWW is about. One of the reasons the later seasons are so different is their clear-eyed look at campaign chaos and shifting loyalties and all the small on-the-ground work that we didn’t see with President Bartlet. The earlier seasons are very much about our found family of staffers and the First Family and watching them fight the status quo that constrains them because they won. They always want to do better, and be better, and as much as they acknowledge the reality that you have to win in order to change the world, the show still promises us that it’s the change that actually matters, and it isn’t worth winning if you have to sell your soul to do it.

So if there’s a spectrum along which everyone falls, based on how much they’re willing to ‘go along to get along’ versus making trouble for the sake of their beliefs, Will Bailey is on the exact opposite end from say, Amy Gardner, with our core characters in the middle. I’ve rambled about Amy before, about how her values and priorities are so different from our heroes that she’s an antagonist even as she works with them a lot of the time. Will has the same complicated relationship with the people we’ve been rooting for for years, but for drastically different reasons. Amy is at odds with the West Wing because she’ll do whatever it takes to win the argument and get what she wants, pulling the Democrats to the left whenever possible.

Will, though–especially in S5 and beyond–is at odds with the West Wing even when he’s in the West Wing, because for all his ideals, he has no problem with compromise. He sees nothing wrong with moving to the middle if it helps you win, if it gets you more power. He’s willing to look like an idiot for the White House, he’s willing to go in front of the press core and be beaten up for days if it will help the cause, he doesn’t hesitate to jump to a new campaign that he thinks could win, because winning is how you get the things you want. Probably, being a diplomat’s son has something to do with how accommodating he is, and how able Will is to justify any position, any choice. We’re told he’s very good with words, but he was probably also good at Debate in school, because he can clearly turn any situation around as needed.

Which means that while Will’s instinct is to adjust and Amy’s is to dig her heels in, they share the one quality that makes any TWW character harder to like: they answer only to themselves. Above all else, their ‘constituency of one’ is themselves rather than a specific politician or even the party. Will is a Democrat, but he’ll happily buck the party wisdom in favor of what he thinks will win. And that puts him up against Toby, the President, Josh, etc, at different times because he bases his choices on his own ideals and they’re just **different** from those of the Bartlet Administration, which spends 8 years fighting to stay progressive and deciding it’s better to go down fighting than do or say things they don’t believe in.

Will is also an interesting foil for Donna after she leaves the White House, and not just because they become coworkers and good friends. Along with the fact that she left Josh and struck out on her own, most of her post-Sorkin conflict with Josh is actually based on WHO she went to work for and how differently she and Josh see that decision/what it says about her and her time working under Josh. By going to work for Russell, Donna shows that she’s less concerned with finding the perfect underdog candidate and more interested in a future that keeps up Democratic progress after President Bartlet leaves office. She is never dedicated to Russell as a man, and over time becomes visibly concerned with his flaws as a man and a candidate. But tellingly, Will isn’t any more personally loyal to Russell than Donna is–and he’s the one running the man’s whole campaign!

It says a lot about Will that for all the moments when Russell shows himself to be less than honorable, Will clearly disagrees with his actions…but he stays. Because Russell was never why he left the Bartlet Administration, or why he took on the new campaign. He took it on because he’s good at winning campaigns, and in Russell he saw someone who could win, and he may have even admired the antagonistic streak that came out once Russell became VP. Russell also had no interest in the ‘cult of Bartlet’ and quickly proved that he wouldn’t even have the level of respect that Hoynes had for Josiah Bartlet as a man. Most of the characters on TWW consider that strike one against Russell and a major character flaw, but Will doesn’t. He respects the President and the office but he didn’t know Jed before the MS reveal, he sees him from more of a removed distance, and his White House job is a JOB to him more than a calling.

Again, some of this was less true during the Sorkin era. The Will Bailey who lost the ability to speak when he was officially offered Sam’s position is much more in awe of the gravity of it all, and it’s hard to see that guy jumping ship to support a moderate candidate that nobody in the White House even likes. But the hints of who he ends up as were there from the beginning, the way he tells off Sam and Toby even before he works with them–he’s always an outsider.

So the outsider factor, that makes it harder to like Will or any TWW character that doesn’t automatically get along with the others. Ainsley Hayes may be ‘the enemy’ as a Republican, but she is amiable and smoothly tries to change minds–and when she isn’t able to, she opts to live and let live. Will is harsher, more combative at times, and I don’t know if it’s just me, but that makes me feel defensive and protective towards the staffers he’s arguing with. After all, I adore them and I barely **know** him, how dare he?

But of course, his actions and his beliefs make perfect sense from HIS perspective. He’s had a successful career, and being a part of the Administration was never a goal of his, so he doesn’t need to go out of his way to defer to their judgement or stay quiet in the face of their superior wisdom. He was raised to know how to work people and get his way, but he was also raised with incredible privilege and confidence and if he was banished from TWW inner circle it wouldn’t be much of a loss for him. Being an outsider isn’t a problem for him, he spent his life that way as a diplomat’s son, so he never feels the need to conform the way he would have to in order to really become a part of the gang.

Honestly, the only reason he ever gels as a part of the group is because Josh leaves and Toby is fired and they need Will to speak for the White House–finally he’s the ultimate insider, he’s the Bartlet mouthpiece, and the only original senior staffer left is CJ, so once Will and Kate bond they’re the center of the staff that’s left, and he has somebody on his side. (And once he’s off the campaign trail, the show goes back to highlighting his neurotic and geeky side, because he can’t be the ‘win at all costs’ guy anymore and needed a new focus.)

So here’s why I think it can be hard to like Will: he often seems like an entitled, immune-to-criticism, antagonistic opportunist. At his worst he seems to think the means justify the ends, despite his progressive beliefs in general, and that means he’s the guy who could get almost anybody elected–which is great when it’s S3 and Bruno Gianelli is on Bartlet’s side, but less so when Russell seems like not much of an improvement on Hoynes in terms of decency and intelligence and Will has the skills to actually make that guy President.

BUT, (and I can’t guarantee this will help you but I think it’s important because Will does exist as a complex, multidimensional character, and that’s a good thing even though it means he has flaws) at his best he is an adorable dork who wants to make the world better, will take jobs because he believes they need doing even if they’re not his own personal dream, is willing to put himself in danger to save and protect others, and is not just talented but also very knowledgeable about the same kind of geeky Constitutional and political history that Jed Bartlet is.

What I’m trying to say is that Will, as much as anyone on TWW, is the product of his good and bad qualities, and both sides of that equation come from his core traits. His ability to ignore others’ criticism because he’s secure in who he is can be annoying when it’s Toby or Josh trying to talk sense into him, but it also means he survives hazing with friendly ease and stands up for the White House’s positions like a pro. He cares more about winning than fighting the narrowest version of the good fight, but he’s not wrong that winning is better for progressive goals than losing for the sake of ideological purity (hi 2016, I have not missed you). He isn’t loyal to the Bartlet Adminstration above all else–but if everyone were, then the President would be a dictator. Intra-party fighting can weaken a party but it also allows for diversity rather than a cult mentality.

So, here’s what it comes down to. Will isn’t Sam, and that means Toby could never really like or trust him, even if he had become more loyal. Will is a political relativist, which means Josh was never going to agree with his choices, as Josh has always put people first and hates having to compromise. Will is a privileged white guy (played by a Jewish actor, but never canonically established as Jewish) so CJ tolerates him but doesn’t genuinely like him for some time, because that’s just how she rolls. Leo leaves Will under Toby’s purview, and Jed has even less direct interaction with him. He spends a lot of his time battling a group of young female interns we never see again (tbh I can’t stand those scenes and if that’s where you get your creep factor, I get it). Given how disconnected he often is from the central cast, is it any wonder he’s mostly underappreciated and ignored by fans as well?

As for why the female characters on the show don’t seem bothered by him, even when you are, I think there’s a couple of possible explanations. First of all, TWW is a show that doesn’t show us that much–we have to assume that all of these characters, who practically live at work, spend a TON of time together offscreen, just by the nature of their jobs. If most of that time is similar to Will’s comedic scenes, where he’s a giant nerd with bikes in his office whose response to stress is the fetal position, then presumably his coworkers see his flawed human side, in an endearing rather than annoying way.

And secondly, we as viewers don’t have that perspective. We don’t even have the benefit of being these characters living in the early ‘00s, when it was a given that the government would be full of overconfident oblivious men and that’s just what women were expected to handle with poise and sweetness. Clearly things haven’t changed much over the years when it comes to White House staff and a backdrop of misogyny at work, but for a lot of us as viewers the world has progressed.

So Donna gets along with Will as her boss who can be kind of dense or morally ambivalent sometimes, but she’s also spent almost a decade dealing with the most powerful men in America. As an assistant, for most of that time. To her, even Will’s worst moments are barely a blip in the grand scheme of things. And CJ is totally unimpressed by Will’s smarts and talent because she works with the smartest and most talented men she’s ever known, but he serves a purpose and doesn’t get in her way, so she has no problem with him. Kate rose to power through the ranks of military men and has **definitely** seen, and probably injured, worse guys than Will Bailey. All the women of TWW have spent their careers dealing with men of varying character. I mean, even compared to some of Sam’s comments, Will must seem downright harmless.

**TL;DR Can Will Bailey be a patronizing know-it-all who puts his own interests before party and found family? Absolutely. Is he a bad guy? Not at all. He’s just a different kind of good guy than those The West Wing conditioned us to admire and root for.**


	2. Toby Ziegler in S7, or Why He's Not The Leak

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> Thoughts on Toby in season seven and headcanons about his leak storyline.

**Notes for the Chapter:**

> On my blog [here.](https://actuallylorelaigilmore.tumblr.com/post/178749251285/what-are-your-opinions-on-s7-toby)

_What are your opinions on s7 Toby??_

*stretches* okay, here we go. when we’re talking about s7 toby, an important disclaimer: i can’t separate the show canon from the bts drama. i just can’t do it. it’s too important to me.

so first of all, the parts of s7 toby that i vehemently reject and disagree with are the result of aaron sorkin leaving the show, the actor who plays toby deciding he was done after s6, and the post-sorkin showrunners reaching a deal with him that he would stay through s7 since it was going to be the last one. then they decided to write him out with an arc so egregiously out of character for toby that sorkin himself called the actor when he found out about it to say he would never have done that to him or his character.

second, the fact that i stan one prickly mumbly communications director and in THIS house toby took the fall for the real leaker should in no way minimize my love and adoration for the ACTING in s7. toby’s confession to cj and his entire exit episode is a gut punch of incredible, layered acting that hits me where i live and i watch it with awe even though i hate that he was ever given the storyline to begin with. because hi my name is toni and i like government and crying. and richard schiff’s response to being given a storyline he totally disagreed with for his character was to play the whole thing like there was some underlying reason for the confession and all that followed, and it’s amazing to see how he delivers what the show wanted but in his own stubborn way makes it possible for the viewers to read into his actions in other ways.

now as for the actual leak storyline? the idea that TOBIAS ZACHARY ZIEGLER, the guy who gave the ‘we’re a team’ speech, the guy whose heartbreak over the MS reveal was about how sacred he considered their roles to be, the guy who would loyally withhold information from his BEST FRIEND because it was best for their administration…the idea that TOBY would turn around, however much he was upset with the President, however much he was grieving the death of his brother, and reveal state secrets?? i don’t care about canon, i don’t care about the writers’ intentions, you will never be able to convince me that he was the leak. i am very rarely That Person, but you can fight me on this. until the day i die.

actually, after that. in my AFTERLIFE i will still be mad about what my show of shows did to toby, the sweet sad eeyore of the bartlet administration.

toby was in it for the long haul, toby was ready to see the president through the end of his second term and then find a new way to keep pushing him and everyone else toward progress. toby had his whole world turned upside down when he met his children, and even national crises couldn’t stop his life from revolving around them. the only thing more important to toby than truth and justice was family–his own and his family of choice in the white house.

which brings us to the big secret plotline of s7: ANDREA WYATT WAS THE LEAK AND TOBY WENT TO JAIL TO PROTECT HER AND HIS KIDS AND HIS BEST FRIEND WHO WAS THE MAIN WHITE HOUSE SUSPECT. my belief in this version of s7 is unshakable and if you watch s7 with this twist in mind, it makes it all make more sense.

andy trying so hard to get toby to blame his dead brother, being pissed at him for how his confession affects her career while also putting herself out there to get him a pardon…can you say defiant guilt? she has congressional connections to information, she likes to pick principled fights, and she clearly never thought toby would put himself on the line the way he does… ****the way he only would to save someone he loved.

toby ziegler would not destroy his career, his friendships, his credibility, and his chance to be there for his kids growing up the way his own father was not, just to ‘tell the truth’ about a government action he disagreed with. he had great respect for the president even when he disagreed with him, not to mention a deep loyalty and respect for the way the government was supposed to work.

toby was deeply and fundamentally honorable. he stated his case when he disagreed with something, and if he was overruled after he did all he could to change minds, he accepted that. josh could fly off the handle, cj would slip up, but toby cared more about the proper function of the government than just getting his way. even toby’s rebellions, like fixing social security, started with him getting permission to maneuver behind the scenes.

however, toby also had a hard life. he suffered. he carried a sadness around with him, and he worried about his ability to be a good parent because of the way he could be detached and darkly realistic. (i feel like his judaism plays a large part in all of this too, but since i’m not jewish i don’t feel i can speak to that.) if anyone would decide to martyr himself, would decide that his children needed their mother and his coworkers needed their suspicion-free bonds back more than he needed the life he had built…it would be toby.

as s6 ends and s7 begins, you can actually see toby grow more and more alarmed by the way cj brushes off the investigation closing in around her. you can see his anger at the idea that he would tarnish his brother’s legacy to save himself and his disinterest in a pardon as part of the same calculation: he’s not looking to be saved, not by his best friend, not by the man he worked to put in charge of the country, and not by the mother of his children. he was saving THEM, when he made the careful, excruciating, deliberate choice to confess.

for toby, asking for a pardon would temper his honorable act of self-sacrifice. it would be taking the lifeboat, when he has never been that guy. in the end, he does receive the pardon, he does take the lifeboat, but i think it was more because the people in his life that he loved most were begging him to do it. the unavoidable consequences of toby sacrificing himself, the ones that were hardest for him to bear, was the pain he caused his kids, andy, cj, and the rest of his west wing family.

someone had to pay, and toby was willing to be that guy, but he couldn’t totally spare the rest of them the backlash and the collateral damage. being pardoned mitigated the effects on everyone else, so he sought the pardon–but if the president had refused, toby would have continued on, certain (right or wrong) that he did the best he could, that he made the honorable choice, the loyal one, the loving one.

now that i’ve gotten all that out of the way, i recognize that you asked about s7 toby, not the leak specifically. tbh, that’s what almost all of his scenes in s7 are about, but i have to give honorable mentions to the fact that even tainted by scandal, you can’t stop toby from trying to save his friends from themselves. he hates that his ex-wife won’t let him join her in publicly parenting their children, but he also understands and accepts it. he lectures josh about his campaign, because in a just universe toby would be right there with him, arguing every day. he flirts and nearly cries with cj over their past and present, before sending her to the future he knows she wants. what he wants is no longer relevant; he just needs his people to be okay.

and for me, the MVP of ‘here today’ is oliver babish because you’re DAMN RIGHT somebody should thank toby for his service. the entire episode is art, heartbreaking fierce art where richard schiff makes sure toby is sorry to have hurt cj and sorry to be causing trouble for the white house and sorry to have disappointed the president, but not sorry for taking a stand.

while the show is very good at giving us characters with different perspectives that make sense even when we disagree with them, toby is so soft and sad and has such a big idealistic heart that i’ll forever be pissed anyway at anyone who hurts him. in s7 that includes cj for not speaking to him at all until she needs him and the president deciding that it wouldn’t be enough to fire toby in disgrace but also to lecture and insult him, like all their years of difficult but deeply respectful back-and-forth were just a cover for an underlying disdain and hate. it was a terrible, unnecessary way to end things between them (awkward epilogue notwithstanding) and unlike his brotherly fight with josh in s6 it just doesn’t ring true for me.

OH. OH!!! in conclusion, i almost forgot that the whole horrible leak storyline also means that when leo dies, toby loses his rightful place among his family, and with the pallbearers, and only charlie shows him lingering compassion. i mean, yay charlie because of course he does, but that just adds insult to the deep and lasting injury that is toby’s s7 existence.

i love him, he deserved better, and he lives forever in my mind as a principled man who did what he could to stop his families from being torn apart, even when that meant letting people hate him for things he didn’t actually do.

**tl;dr toby being the leak makes no sense. toby claiming to be the leak and sacrificing himself for the people he loves makes all the sense. also richard schiff breaks my heart and s7 toby deserved better.**


	3. Donna and Amy and Their Potential For Friendship

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> Thoughts on whether Donna and Amy could have been friends, during or after canon, by request.

**Notes for the Chapter:**

> On my blog [here.](https://actuallylorelaigilmore.tumblr.com/post/181028439195/i-have-an-odd-tww-question-for-you-do-you-think)

_I have an odd TWW question for you: Do you think Amy and Donna could ever be friends or at least have a good working relationship? I don’t know how much they’d be working together in the Santos Administration, but I’m assuming they’d have to interact from time to time._

My honest opinion? Yeah, they could. In canon, they’re both good at their jobs. Donna holds herself back professionally sticking close to Josh, and Amy was not great AT relationships, to be honest…but they’re both amazing at what they do in the White House and on the campaign trail. 

Okay, actually we see that Amy’s not so good at deferring to a President, but I think that will be less of an issue in the Santos Administration because she knows going in that her involvement is wanted TO make waves and have debates, which is her forte. 

Also, it’s not like we ever saw them get into actual fights when they had to interact before. Donna wasn’t pleased watching Amy come and go from Josh’s orbit, it wasn’t a cycle she liked witnessing, but she held her tongue and tried not to let it affect her direct relationship with Josh (see: “my man! you came back to me!” after his Russia trip, while he’s dating Amy…because their banter remained the same). 

And Amy heard rumors about Josh and Donna before she even considered dating him, but she talked to her on the phone like an adult and works directly with Donna during Commencement. I love that episode and seeing the actresses together because they’re both amazing and there’s so many layers underneath their bland professional rhetoric before it dives into the personal. Even then Donna barely snaps at her, answering a direct question because Amy pushes her into it. 

And I think it’s important to note that–that it’s Amy who’s always the one crossing those lines, both with Josh and Donna. She’s the one with impulse control issues (gosh I love her, I find that painfully relatable and human) who throws water balloons after pretending she isn’t interested, who kisses Josh first instead of the other way around, who pokes her faves with sticks and leaves a dead fish and instigates a very public article, who isn’t willing to see that Donna is annoyed and then just let it go. 

By season 7, though, she’s grown up enough I think to see the difference between what she likes and wants (fights, passion, competition) and what she needs to be healthy and happy (civilization, quiet moments, someone who doesn’t need to race her anywhere). Post-canon, I don’t know whether Amy’s relationship with the wood sculptor is gonna last though. I think it’s a lot easier to know what’s better for her than actually live with it…especially given how uncomfortable she clearly is when she describes it to Josh. 

As a restless soul myself, I’d understand if Amy ended up imploding that relationship eventually rather than being able to make it work the way Josh was able to get past his issues long enough to make Donna a priority in S7 and fly away to work things out. Amelia Gardner might just not be the settling down type, even if she finds someone more grounding, the way Josh needed someone like Donna who could meet him on both the political-junkie and eat-a-real-meal-you-idiot levels of companionship.

In my personal opinion, by “Requiem,” Amy is over Josh and isn’t just trying to set him up for some weird ulterior motive. I think she honestly sees their past as passed. Which means finding out about him and Donna once they’re all in the Santos administration will likely (again in my opinion) be hilarious to her. Like, she tried to get him to admit his feelings before the reelection campaign! How clueless he was. 

I doubt it’ll bother her much by then, because I think her interactions throughout S3 and 4 are infused with a constant awareness that they guy she’s with has feelings for his assistant but refuses to admit them to himself. Amy was willing to date him anyway, but always knew. So it would be weird if post-canon she was bothered by it ‘coming out’ when she was always kind of side-eyeing them and waiting.

Whatever Amy’s destiny is, I see no romantic future with her and Josh. And I like to think that he and Donna stay together until they die. Therefore, she and Donna, talented political pros that they are, should be able to work briskly and well together, like the “Commencement” scenes we might have gotten if Amy wasn’t back in Josh’s romantic orbit during that time. If you take the romantic tension out of that thread, the women are just great coworkers for a minute. It’s awesome.

And if you look at the early stages of Josh and Amy, Amy and Donna have friend potential to me. “Dead Irish Women” is great, with the booze and girltalk in the residence and Amy being the one to remind Josh that Donna needs him. Donna talking to Josh about his girlfriend being a loon on his day off is not awkward like you’d expect given her feelings. It’s just kind of cute; she’s happy Amy makes him happy (while that lasts).

My main takeaway from this is, just think of what kind of amazing exchanges and dynamics we could have had on TWW if the show believed more women can support each other and coexist beyond their love of men. But that’s a seriously other rant tbh.

**tl; dr Yes, I think they have that post-canon potential, because I think they could have had that potential IN canon if the writing of the women of TWW were more complex than it is.**


	4. The Romances of Josh Lyman

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> Thoughts on how Josh's relationships with Mandy, Amy and Donna compare.

**Notes for the Chapter:**

> On my blog [here.](https://actuallylorelaigilmore.tumblr.com/post/177043126010/its-really-fun-to-rewatch-the-west-wing-and-see)

It’s really fun to rewatch The West Wing and see the fiesty Josh and Mandy dynamic they were going for–which they realized later with Josh and Amy instead–and then compare that to the endgame of Josh and Donna.

During hostage negotiations, Mandy doesn’t just treat politics like a game. She outright calls it one, to Josh’s face, while lives are at stake. And it’s not just her being competitive–that’s all that politics is to Mandy, really. Even working for the White House, being part of something great and powerful, she approaches it as a media consultant: her job is about how things look, not what they are. So it’s one big game, a game she is very good at, but that makes her and Josh antagonistic toward each other constantly, because they’re both good at winning but come at it from opposite angles. Then a man dies who she feels responsible for, and Mandy realizes White House politics is more than just a game. But her job is still all about optics, and winning is what she’s good at, so recognizing that the White House isn’t a game at all leaves no place for her. It’s no wonder she slowly starts to disappear.

Amy, in contrast, also approaches politics like a game, but policy is what she lives for. It is the only point, and optics for her just get in the way. Winning is everything to Amy just like it is to Josh, and they still have different definitions of what winning means, but for Amy the game is about cutting through all the careful posturing that Mandy was so good at, in order to press for change. So Amy and Josh are at odds because of core differences in their political values, like he and Mandy were, but for totally different reasons. Trying to change the world to help people’s lives is the point for both Josh and Amy, and based on what we see of her, I can’t say the same is true for Mandy. Maybe it was before we meet her, but by the time she’s making nearly a million dollars a year in the private sector fighting the White House for the sake of winning, she seems to have left behind any interest in putting people before strategy.

When you look at it that way, it’s easier to see why Donna was always going to end up being a good match for Josh. She can be clever, just like he is, in playing the game, and once she moves into her own political strategy career on the campaign she shows more of her detached, cunning side–but when it comes down to it, she and Josh have the exact same political values. Both Josh and Donna approach politics as a human puzzle, problems to be solved, issues and conflicts to untangle to make things happen. 

So underneath the individual issues the characters disagree about, it’s an interesting dynamic to watch because there’s a continuum they fall on, where policy meets sport.

Josh and Donna (along with a lot of their friends in The West Wing) play the game because they have to, while being annoyed by the fact that it’s a game at all when people’s lives are at stake.

Amy plays the game because she has to in order to get her way on policy, but she also wants to win the game so much that it often matters more than actually achieving policy change. 

Mandy plays the game because she approaches politics itself as a game, one she makes a good living out of. Which was great on a campaign, but it makes her a terrible match for Josh.

When Josh treats politics solely as a game, he makes his worst strategic mistakes. He’s at his best when he’s more personal in his approach, not less. It frustrates him that Amy can be so detached and determined to win, whatever the cost. And he hates it even more that Mandy acts like she’s playing a game whose only objective to be superior, with no regard for other people. Maybe he hates it because he knows he can be like that too, in his worst moments.

You could argue that’s also partly why Josh gets so mad at Donna during their time apart. He sees working for Russell as caring more about which candidate will win than which one should. By then, Josh is tired of reluctantly playing the game and finds a candidate who will throw out the rules. But despite what Josh thinks, Donna hasn’t changed her values–she has the approach Josh used to, wanting to win the game for the sake of helping people. She just disagrees with him about how much helping Russell is likely to do and knows he could win. 

**tl;dr Josh and Donna make extra sense bc Donna’s political approach aligns with Josh’s, while Amy’s conflicts too much for them to make it work, and Mandy’s is so different that I’m surprised they even dated.**


	5. Josh and Amy's Political Differences

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> Thoughts on how Josh and Amy differ in the ways they approach politics.

**Notes for the Chapter:**

> On my blog [here.](https://actuallylorelaigilmore.tumblr.com/post/176926460120/well-now-youve-gotten-me-curious-what-do-you)

_Well, now you’ve gotten me curious. What do you think Josh and Amy’s political differences are? I don’t see it discussed much, so I’m interested in your take on it._

Hi! When it comes to their policy differences, like individual issues and what they believe, I think their perspectives are often similar. The differences we know about, we see onscreen, like watching them argue about forced prostitution. And even then, the real crux of their argument is about legislation, action–not ideology.

Basically, Amy and Josh are both determined to ‘win’…but they have radically different definitions of what winning means. 

For Amy, winning means never wavering from what she believes is the right outcome, no matter the cost. Amy will burn things down rather than compromise, make enemies instead of smoothing things over. See: when Abbey expects her to make a polite excuse and save her, and instead she demolishes a woman–or Amy losing her job because she wouldn’t stop fighting Josh. She’s seeking progress, she’s abrasive at times, she causes problems as a way of forcing change, and incremental change isn’t good enough. 

Josh, on the other hand, while he has his moments of digging his heels in, doesn’t think in black and white like Amy does. Josh looks at politics pragmatically, trying to help people and bring them together and solve problems. Sure, he would love to have the choice to just make people do what he knows is obviously the right thing, and it frustrates him to play by the rules of the game…but it’s the only way he can win and support his President and Chief of Staff’s agenda. 

Politics for Josh is personal, and what his bosses want and think of him matter. Amy moves from one advocacy group to the next, which means she doesn’t have to get attached or deal with the consequences of demanding everything be her way.

There’s probably a metaphor for their relationship in there somewhere, if you squint.


End file.
